Reports critical of `faster, better, cheaper' at NASA

Posted: Tuesday, March 14, 2000

By MATTHEW FORDAHLAP Science Writer

LOS ANGELES (AP) - NASA's space exploration program is trying to do too much with too little money and not understanding the risks that could lead to embarrassments like last year's failed Mars missions, according to two panels of experts.

On the Net: NASA's Web site: http://www.nasa.gov

NASA's Mars Polar Lander site: http://marslander.jpl.nasa.gov

The reports released Monday did not suggest the agency abandon its mantra of ``faster, cheaper, better'' missions, but instead urged officials to focus less on quickness and cost and more on quality and reliability.

``The success of `faster, better, cheaper' is tempered by the fact that some projects and programs have put too much emphasis on cost and schedule reduction,'' said one panel led by Arthur Stephenson, director of the Marshall Space Flight Center.

``We need to slow down some, not rush too quickly into important programs and projects, plan and implement them more carefully,'' said Tony Spear, who led the other review and is a former manager at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory.

Last year was especially difficult for NASA: In addition to losing two Mars probes, space shuttle flights were delayed, the Hubble Space Telescope temporarily shut down and other missions either missed their targets or failed at launch.

``We knew this change would not be easy,'' Goldin said. ``We knew we would have problems.''

JPL, which operated both the $125 million Mars Climate Orbiter and $165 million Mars Polar Lander, said the failed missions serve as a wake-up call.

``The lessons learned, findings and recommendations seem to be on target, and we intend to take them seriously and do what we can to make the necessary improvements here at JPL,'' said Larry Dumas, the lab's deputy director.

A common theme runs through both reports: ``Faster, better, cheaper'' missions place too much emphasis on cost and schedule reduction and too little on management, oversight, leadership and evaluating risk.

The Climate Orbiter, for instance, was lost when a contractor failed to convert measurements into metric units. The $125 million probe flew too close to Mars on Sept. 23 and is believed to have burned up in the atmosphere.

The mistake itself was not as serious as the failure to catch it, the review board said. Its first report, issued in November, attempted to remedy the failures before Mars Polar Lander arrived.

But the $165 million spacecraft was last heard from on Dec. 3, just as it was beginning its descent to the surface.

``It's Management 101. They're basically saying there are four things you have to balance: cost, schedule, content and risk,'' said John Pike, an analyst for the Federation of American Scientists. ``But they don't say very much about how to balance those.''

Specifically, the reports do not detail the funding deficiencies and staff shortages that contributed to the problems, he said.

The space agency will decide what specific actions to take by midsummer, said W. Brian Keegan, NASA's chief engineer. Another report, on the loss of the Polar Lander, is due by the end of this month.